(cpp) syntax should be split into C and C++ syntaxes

[mortie]

Currently, C and C++ are both highlighted the same way, but that's not ideal. For example, the words string and vector are highlighted as built-ins, which makes no sense in a C context.

[marcoscaceres]

hhmm... yeah, might be worth splitting into two.

[joshgoebel]

It's also possible we should start with a "C-like" like Prism does. My recent work on CPP/Arduino might make sense to look at as a potential pattern.

[joshgoebel]

Currently, C and C++ are both highlighted the same way, but that's not ideal. For example, the words string and vector are highlighted as built-ins, which makes no sense in a C context.

But those things wouldn't really be using in a C context either, would they?

[mortie]

@yyyc514 In a language where the words "vector" and "string" have no special meaning, they're pretty reasonable variable names.

The context I encountered this in was with tagged unions; something like

struct whatever {
    enum {
        WHATEVER_NUMBER,
        WHATEVER_STRING
    } tag;
    union {
        double number;
        char *string;
    } val;
};

[joshgoebel]

Now just having separate keyword lists would be pretty easy.

[joshgoebel]

@egor-rogov How would you feel if we prepared for this by simply making C a requirement of C++ but for v10 effectively they were still the exact same thing? Ie a patch would only:

• Create a new c language file
• Move the content to c
• cpp depends on c
• Add some comments to explain this.

This would get the "breaking" part of the change out of the way and avoid us having to release v11 just to do this later... Thoughts?